The Move of the Institute for Ritual and Liturgical Studies to Amsterdam : Some Organizational and Programmatic Comments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For more than 22 years Tilburg University hosted the Institute for Ritual and Liturgical Studies (IRiLiS).1 Since 1 January 2015 the institute has continued its existence in Amsterdam at the Protestant Theological University. The transition was celebrated by means of a symposium on February 18, ‘The Future of Ritual: Spots and Shapes’. Where are we heading with ritual and liturgical studies? What are the research topics? What is the future of ritual? What are its spots and shapes? We welcomed distinguished guests from abroad, of whom Ronald Grimes (Waterloo, Canada) and Martin Stringer (Birmingham, UK) lectured at the symposium. Further, the former academic director of IRiLiS, Paul Post, presented a paper. The papers are published in this section of the Yearbook for liturgical and ritual studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.026 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.024 | 0.028 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".